Emergency Landing NW Victoria
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: AMONGST BRIGALOW SUCKERS
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Ha Ha.. That is very good Chuck.
I am going to etch that very true observation upon my memory, to be recalled and pronounced at an appropriate time and place.
Unfortunately I won't be able to afford you any credit for it though
I am going to etch that very true observation upon my memory, to be recalled and pronounced at an appropriate time and place.
Unfortunately I won't be able to afford you any credit for it though
Last edited by BEACH KING; 3rd Sep 2008 at 10:55.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A Bonanza glides a bit like an aerodynamically efficient manhole cover even with the gear up
A Bonanza glides a bit like an aerodynamically efficient manhole cover even with the gear up
Now the V35B, on the other hand, clean, with the throttle closed and the prop on full coarse comes down at a tad over 500'/min, with about 90 kts on the clock! So what's that? A glide ratio of about 18:1?
Dr
Last edited by ForkTailedDrKiller; 6th Sep 2008 at 12:11.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: in the desert
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not passing any judgement on the pilot's actions, he was faced with a decision to make and made one and everyone walked away.
I would like to add to the discussion my view on the surface conditions. From the photo it appears to field is a crop of wheat or barley. Soil compaction is a big no-no for any crop to be successful, as a result it's pretty fair to assume that any field with a crop in is going to be soft (wether it's wet or dry) so unless 100% certain otherwise (say from local knowledge) treat it as soft.
Another potential trap in undulating country is contour banks. If it's undulating to hilly and there's cultivation then it's highly likely there will be contour banks. These can often be obsured by a mature crop and won't be noticed until very close to the ground. It's worth considering landing across the hill rather than up it. Obviously that would need to assessed given the circumstances.
As always, just another perspective to consider,
PW
I would like to add to the discussion my view on the surface conditions. From the photo it appears to field is a crop of wheat or barley. Soil compaction is a big no-no for any crop to be successful, as a result it's pretty fair to assume that any field with a crop in is going to be soft (wether it's wet or dry) so unless 100% certain otherwise (say from local knowledge) treat it as soft.
Another potential trap in undulating country is contour banks. If it's undulating to hilly and there's cultivation then it's highly likely there will be contour banks. These can often be obsured by a mature crop and won't be noticed until very close to the ground. It's worth considering landing across the hill rather than up it. Obviously that would need to assessed given the circumstances.
As always, just another perspective to consider,
PW
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's good point 'OS'. I too don't recall being taught that verbally or even shown results of same with pix etc. I would think that during the course of ones flying career you learn, pick up all sorts of advice (such as from this site) most one would have to decide if it was best for them at the time. At basic training level you had no choice 'cause fixed gear was the norm so such subjects where prolly not talked about. Still airmanship as in sound decision making is everything & that you cannot buy
Interesting discussion though this one.
CW
Interesting discussion though this one.
CW
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting discussion though this one.
There the pilot was given pretty much a "well done" from all for pulling off a gear down force landing.
Jaba
Any body have any info on a very good effort on a forced landing today.
I missed the news, but apparently a job well done after an engone stoped for whatever reason.
I missed the news, but apparently a job well done after an engone stoped for whatever reason.
and the Doc posed the question
If faced with that situation in the Bo, the big question for me would be do you drop the gear - and risk folding the nose wheel and maybe ending up on your back - or put it in gear up?
The A36 manual in such circumstances says "Use of the landing gear is dependant on terrain". Boils down to the pilot making a judgement at a time of high stress and we keyboarders get to judge the resulting rights or wrongs at our leisure.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not being a pilot, what are the chances of the aircraft ending up on it's back with possible physical injuries and/or death to pilot and/or passengers if you conduct a wheels up landing - as compared to the chances with wheels down - generally?
From what everyone seems to be saying, if you are at all uncertain of the surface conditions, you would be better off with wheels up?
I guess if you own the machine and it is uninsured and you have no passengers on board - you would be more inclined to have a go wheels down?
Di
From what everyone seems to be saying, if you are at all uncertain of the surface conditions, you would be better off with wheels up?
I guess if you own the machine and it is uninsured and you have no passengers on board - you would be more inclined to have a go wheels down?
Di
what are the chances of the aircraft ending up on it's back with possible physical injuries and/or death to pilot and/or passengers if you conduct a wheels up landing - as compared to the chances with wheels down - generally?
Dr
Grandpa Aerotart
You're right it is a bit hard to argue with success and I admit to being more intrigued about what put him down in the first place but allowed him to fly out again the next day.
Like I said...he was VERY lucky.
I am not suggesting gear up is the only option but that it may be the 'best' option in a range of circumstances and it intrigues me why that option seems to have fallen through the cracks in the last 10 or 20 years. If there are good reasons why, then I haven't heard them.
I went back and re read the ABS article from the fella who went into the corn field. It is 'interesting' to read.
He did say that BPPP had taught him to put the wheels down but didn't allude to whether that statement was contingent on circumstances. He did remark that when he put the gear down his ROD 'doubled' and he all of a sudden wasn't going to make his first choice field and turned for the corn crop. He made the point that he was telling himself "Don't stall, don't stall" all the way in but then proceeded to round out and flare on the top of the crop - 10' off the ground - the nose/left main undercarriage collapsed as he yawed through 90 degrees after ground impact. Did LOTS of damage to an aeroplane he'd just spent 80k upgrading. The engine had 35 hours on it but 'partially' failed because of miss use of the mixture/throttle while formation flying. He was in formation on the way to Oshkosh doing that B2Osh thing they do every year.
This to me is a classic case of not thinking through a scenario before hand. If I was going into a mature crop it would be wheels up and I would try to round out just below the top of the crop - fly into it - and then flare while settling into the crop.
If there is one thing my time in PNG taught me it is 'fly the aircraft as far into the crash as possible'. Several were the occasions when I thought I was history but kept flying the aeroplane and got away with it. Fly the aeroplane to a standstill and you will be surprised at the result. The classic example was my last forced landing in a C185 on a road just outside the circuit at Moresby. I was landing downhill, around a corner and in Sunday afternoon traffic - I hit a power pole support cable just above the road and the aircraft pitched down bloody near vertical - all I could see was road for an instant. If I had given up and flung my hands in front of my face we would have landed upside down and probably been severely injured or worse. As it was I kept flying the aircraft and we landed with only slight damage to the aircraft caused by the tie rod end of the cable whipping around the aircraft and removing the front of the pod and r/h cowl flap. That I managed to straighten the hook and rip it out of the concrete says much about Melanesian workmanship for which I am eternally grateful
I tried to compress the piccy and failed.
Like I said...he was VERY lucky.
I am not suggesting gear up is the only option but that it may be the 'best' option in a range of circumstances and it intrigues me why that option seems to have fallen through the cracks in the last 10 or 20 years. If there are good reasons why, then I haven't heard them.
I went back and re read the ABS article from the fella who went into the corn field. It is 'interesting' to read.
He did say that BPPP had taught him to put the wheels down but didn't allude to whether that statement was contingent on circumstances. He did remark that when he put the gear down his ROD 'doubled' and he all of a sudden wasn't going to make his first choice field and turned for the corn crop. He made the point that he was telling himself "Don't stall, don't stall" all the way in but then proceeded to round out and flare on the top of the crop - 10' off the ground - the nose/left main undercarriage collapsed as he yawed through 90 degrees after ground impact. Did LOTS of damage to an aeroplane he'd just spent 80k upgrading. The engine had 35 hours on it but 'partially' failed because of miss use of the mixture/throttle while formation flying. He was in formation on the way to Oshkosh doing that B2Osh thing they do every year.
This to me is a classic case of not thinking through a scenario before hand. If I was going into a mature crop it would be wheels up and I would try to round out just below the top of the crop - fly into it - and then flare while settling into the crop.
If there is one thing my time in PNG taught me it is 'fly the aircraft as far into the crash as possible'. Several were the occasions when I thought I was history but kept flying the aeroplane and got away with it. Fly the aeroplane to a standstill and you will be surprised at the result. The classic example was my last forced landing in a C185 on a road just outside the circuit at Moresby. I was landing downhill, around a corner and in Sunday afternoon traffic - I hit a power pole support cable just above the road and the aircraft pitched down bloody near vertical - all I could see was road for an instant. If I had given up and flung my hands in front of my face we would have landed upside down and probably been severely injured or worse. As it was I kept flying the aircraft and we landed with only slight damage to the aircraft caused by the tie rod end of the cable whipping around the aircraft and removing the front of the pod and r/h cowl flap. That I managed to straighten the hook and rip it out of the concrete says much about Melanesian workmanship for which I am eternally grateful
I tried to compress the piccy and failed.
Last edited by Chimbu chuckles; 4th Sep 2008 at 05:18.
What the ????
GB, are they water buffalo in the top pic of the A36 (the uncrumpled one!)?
Dr
GB, are they water buffalo in the top pic of the A36 (the uncrumpled one!)?
Dr
Looking the other way. The trees down the other end of the paddock are around 4000' away. The fence behind is about 40 yards away. Says it all really.
Grandpa Aerotart
You'd have to think that gear down was all right turning finals into that paddock...mindfull that it is likely soft and to keep the weight off the nosewheel and go absolutely straight.
Very sad end to an aircraft.
GB PM enroute.
Very sad end to an aircraft.
GB PM enroute.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I clearly state earlier that the weather down here has not been conducive to a forced landing in a paddock but there seems to be a number of soil experts amongst us who believe otherwise! My point proven, thanks for the pic 
Interesting because nearby Quambatook recorded just 28mm for the month of August when the mean is 37mm (so abt 75% of LTA). Unfortunately BOM don't have the daily distribution up on the website.
But they do for Swan Hill - it had 24.4mm in Aug, of which 7.4mm fell after the day of the prang! And their LTA is 35.9. So they had only 70% of avg.
But even of more interest is that they only had 0.6mm of rain in the fifteen days prior to the accident.
If that paddock is saturated it must be like a giant sponge with a concrete slab under it, and no evapotranspiration happening. Could be I suppose?
PS Quamba also only had 25.2mm for July (67% LTA) and 13.9mm in June (40% LTA).
But they do for Swan Hill - it had 24.4mm in Aug, of which 7.4mm fell after the day of the prang! And their LTA is 35.9. So they had only 70% of avg.
But even of more interest is that they only had 0.6mm of rain in the fifteen days prior to the accident.
If that paddock is saturated it must be like a giant sponge with a concrete slab under it, and no evapotranspiration happening. Could be I suppose?
PS Quamba also only had 25.2mm for July (67% LTA) and 13.9mm in June (40% LTA).
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the latest photo I would guess that the paddock surface was eminently suitable for a gear down - sorry to differ VH-XXX. As gassed budgie suggests, a touch down closer to the trees and this thread possibly wouldn't exist. The deep gouges I would say are caused by the aircraft travelling sideways, the aircraft is turning left and would explain the upturned right wing tip as its hit the ground in the turn and nose wheel snapped.
Edited to add - in a max possible turn the radius of turn for the outer wheel is 15 feet 10 inches and for the nose wheel 13 feet 8 inches ie the nose wheel and outer wheel are pretty close. Look at the tracks made in the photo and it certainly seems she is sliding sideways and digging divots with the outer wheel.
Edited to add - in a max possible turn the radius of turn for the outer wheel is 15 feet 10 inches and for the nose wheel 13 feet 8 inches ie the nose wheel and outer wheel are pretty close. Look at the tracks made in the photo and it certainly seems she is sliding sideways and digging divots with the outer wheel.
Last edited by Brian Abraham; 5th Sep 2008 at 06:17.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Mars
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, is the crop dying at the site of the upturned aeroplane due to fuel leakage from the tanks?
Dr
Dr
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A great photo for further chatting about.
'BA' I have to totally agree with you, those wheel marks are not caused by a plane going in a straight line, the earth has been gouged out. You can see the grass has been ripped out not just compacted as in what you would expect to see after a car of plane had driven along it. Still it's all only opinions here but looks hard enough to me & when you think about it we are all the same when it comes to making such a decision good or bad.
CW
'BA' I have to totally agree with you, those wheel marks are not caused by a plane going in a straight line, the earth has been gouged out. You can see the grass has been ripped out not just compacted as in what you would expect to see after a car of plane had driven along it. Still it's all only opinions here but looks hard enough to me & when you think about it we are all the same when it comes to making such a decision good or bad.
CW
Last edited by Capt Wally; 5th Sep 2008 at 09:00.